Bankruptcy
In re J. M. MERTENS & CO.
147 F. 182·United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·1906
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
In re J. M. MERTENS & CO.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
May 22, 1906.)
No. 12.
Petition for Revision of Proceedings of the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of New York.
See 144 Fed. 818; 142 Fed. 445.
L. M. Friedman, for petitioner.
C. H. Lewis, for respondent.
Before WALLACE, TOWNSEND, and COXE, Circuit Judges.
[MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.]
PER CURIAM.
The order under review enjoins the American Woolen Company from prosecuting an action in the Supreme Court of the state of New York which it had brought against the trustee in bankruptcy to recover the value of certain personal property alleged to belong to the woolen company, and which the trustee took into his possession as the property of the bankrupts and sold as a part of the bankrupts’ estate. The order restrains the plaintiff in an action of trover from recovering the value of property which, if its contention is correct, never became part of the bankrupts’ estate, and was converted by the trustee. In effect the order overrules several decisions of this court. In re Russell & Burkett, 101 Fed. 248, 41 C. C. A. 323; In re Kanter & Cohen, 121 Fed. 984, 58 C. C. A. 260; In re Spitzer, 130 Fed. 879, 66 C. C. A. 35; In re Grissler, 136 Fed. 754, 69 C. C. A. 406. We find nothing in Whitney v. Wenman, 198 U. S. 539, 25 Sup. Ct. 778, 49 L. Ed. 1157, which conflicts with the views expressed in these decisions.
The order is reversed, with costs.